Has anyone noticed the abundant's of apostrophe's in plural's?
Once confined solely to greengrocers (apparently), this misuse of the apostrophe is widespread amongst adults and young people, in my area, anyway. “CD's and DVD's for sale”, “Bring your hat's and scarf's” (ouch) and (possibly the most worrying I have seen) “Math's and English Tuition”. I am confident that sarcasm was in no way involved- people do really think that it is fine to write like this.
Language is not set in stone, except in the cemetery. On the contrary, it constantly evolves. However, this quirk of the apostrophe seems nonsensical: not only is it grammatically incorrect (nothing belongs to the hat or scarf, and no letters are missing) but it makes words longer than before. In a world of text-speak, where the objective is to get your message across in as few characters as possible. Why would you suddenly want to use more? It seems to make life more difficult.
But this is not just an inglorious rant about apostrophes- the wider question is this: do commonplace breaches of grammar like these mean that our language is going down the plug’ole? English teachers seem to think so. But thinking again, this kind of thing has been happening since the birth of language- Old English is old for a reason: it has evolved so much (both by introducing parts of foreign languages and internally) that most of the words are obsolete. Picture the scene: An English lesson. Cedric, (thine English teacher, then in the prime of his Youth) sits at his desk.
(I take no responsibility for historical accuracy and/or offence to teachers of English.) Cedric: Sire.
Master: Prithee, what is’t, boy?
Cedric: I simply don't understand this mark, sire.
Master: “Do not”, boy. You “do not” understand this mark, sire. How many times must I tell thee? Let me see. (thinks) I have marked it 'D', boy, because it is filled with contractions! The most vulgar of modern slang*- what is the English language coming to? It may be considered acceptable in thy childish circles alas!, but is certainly not in my lessons!
Cedric: But sire! You use contractions.
Master: I most certainly do not.
Cedric: “Prithee”, sire. It is a contraction of “pray thee”. And is’...OUCH! (Cedric breaketh off his dialogue under assault from the board rubber.) Master: … … ! Where is thy respect for thine elders? Do not answer back in that manner! etc. etc.
Cedric looks pleased with himself, (but less pleased after the beating).
Language has changed throughout the centuries (much to the distaste of grammar sticklers) and this is not necessarily a bad thing. For instance, a perfectly acceptable word, “Dog”, appeared for no known reason in the fourteenth century (the previous word was “Hound” from the German “Hund”) and I'm sure there were plenty of people protesting that the language was being defiled by made-up words. I must admit that apostrophes in plurals make me feel very uneasy and they are incorrect. What's more, it really does pay to be careful with your punctuation, especially in formal writing. Those who know about the rules governing apostrophes will not take you seriously if they find these errors in your writing, whereas those who don't will not consider you a grammar snob- they won't even notice!
My gut feeling is that these apostrophes will die out- it's just impractical to write and type unnecessary punctuation, and my prediction is that people will realise this without being told they are wrong by an English teacher. However, with new language, you never know. We'll just have to wait and see if it stick's.
* Anachronism. The first attested use of the term “slang” was in the 18th century.
Anna Tindall
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here